Are caches listed that are on private and that fact is not mentioned?

[+Matt_B_Good]

Are caches listed that are on private and that fact is not mentioned? I went for a cache today thinking it was on public land. As I was leaving a police officer pulled me over. Well, I looked for the cache in the dark. It was listed as a 24/7 cache. It was only like 8:40 or so. The one officer said it was not public land that it was owned by the railroad. they went as far as sending a dog into the woods. I think it was just needless harassment by paranoid police. they didn't charge me with any crime because they couldn't. I didn't believe the officer about it being owned by the railroad either, it wouldn't be the first time a police officer lied. My concern here is if there are listed caches on private land that are not listed as such? I would hate to get a trespassing charge (as unlikely as that is) thinking I was on public land. i think it is DNR management land.

Edited March 10, 2010 by Matt_B_Good

[+bittsen]

Are caches listed that are on private and that fact is not mentioned? I went for a cache today thinking it was on public land. As I was leaving a police officer pulled me over. Well, I looked for the cache in the dark. It was listed as a 24/7 cache. It was only like 8:40 or so. The one officer said it was not public land that it was owned by the railroad. they went as far as sending a dog into the woods. I think it was just needless harassment by paranoid police. they didn't charge me with any crime because they couldn't. I didn't believe the officer about it being owned by the railroad either, it wouldn't be the first time a police officer lied. My concern here is if there are listed caches on private land that are not listed as such? I would hate to get a trespassing charge (as unlikely as that is) thinking I was on public land. i think it is DNR management land.

 

The reality is that there are MANY caches that are on private property without permission.

 

Groundspeak is just a listing service and doesn't check when caches are published. The legality of the hide rests with the cache hider.

If the cache was on RR property then there has to be a record of the property somewhere. If the officer just "said" it was RR property, I would forget it and move on. You already found the cache, right?

[+jopasm]

I'm sure there are quite a few. Sometimes it's an honest mistake on the cachers part (private property mistaken for part of public lands), sometimes it seems like it's just a failure to do any research. I've seen at least one cache that was next to a "no trespassing, private property" sign, I moved on and didn't even attempt a find. The sign had obviously been placed recently, I wonder if the cache had something to do with that.

[+grateful cacher]

Many times railroads consider their property to be totally private. Where I live, there is one small company that hires private security guards to patrol their tracks. The reason for that is that it is used as a bikeway/jogging path since it very rarely has train on it. They make it very clear to not tresspass.

 

[+Matt_B_Good]

Are caches listed that are on private and that fact is not mentioned? I went for a cache today thinking it was on public land. As I was leaving a police officer pulled me over. Well, I looked for the cache in the dark. It was listed as a 24/7 cache. It was only like 8:40 or so. The one officer said it was not public land that it was owned by the railroad. they went as far as sending a dog into the woods. I think it was just needless harassment by paranoid police. they didn't charge me with any crime because they couldn't. I didn't believe the officer about it being owned by the railroad either, it wouldn't be the first time a police officer lied. My concern here is if there are listed caches on private land that are not listed as such? I would hate to get a trespassing charge (as unlikely as that is) thinking I was on public land. i think it is DNR management land.

 

The reality is that there are MANY caches that are on private property without permission.

 

Groundspeak is just a listing service and doesn't check when caches are published. The legality of the hide rests with the cache hider.

If the cache was on RR property then there has to be a record of the property somewhere. If the officer just "said" it was RR property, I would forget it and move on. You already found the cache, right?

 

Interesting. When I tried to publish my first cache it never went through because the land manager did not give permission. I did not find the cache it was a micro, it was dark i was alone with no flashlight. I figured I could find it anyway. I was wrong. The officer tried to tell me animal control was part of the police department as well. I never heard of that. they are a government agency sure but part of the police? I really wish it was easier to find out who owns certain places. There were alot of police around the area. I didn't think of leaving because I was doing nothing illegal that i knew of. Worst case I was trespassing but the chance of getting charged for that is so very small. I only know one person who was ever charged with trespassing and that was bogus anyway. She was invited to the person's house and then got charged with trespassing when she came over. There are over 100 finds on that cache. I was just a victim of a paranoid person. That kind of stinks to find out many caches are placed on private land without permission. I have lots of places I would like to put one but I don't know WHO to ask.

[+WRITE SHOP ROBERT]

 

The reality is that there are MANY caches that are on private property without permission.

 

Another reality is that many LEOs will tell you things that are not true, or they just don't know, in order to scare you into complying with whatever they want you to do.

[+Matt_B_Good]

Many times railroads consider their property to be totally private. Where I live, there is one small company that hires private security guards to patrol their tracks. The reason for that is that it is used as a bikeway/jogging path since it very rarely has train on it. They make it very clear to not tresspass.

 

The only sign I saw was no Dumping. maybe the officer was checking to see if I used the place as a dump as well as for drugs. My car is kind of junky. you tend to get profiled in a junky car.

[+Matt_B_Good]

 

The reality is that there are MANY caches that are on private property without permission.

 

Another reality is that many LEOs will tell you things that are not true, or they just don't know, in order to scare you into complying with whatever they want you to do.

I know some of them lie all the time. This is not to say all of them. It is kind of sad. i like looking for caches at night until someone actually charges me with a crime and even then I will fight it just out of principal.

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

That most caches do not have adequate permission is what I call 'Geocaching's Dirty Little Secret'.

 

Caches hidden on private land require explicit permission from the landowner.

 

In places like people's homes and farms that's pretty well enforced.

 

On land such as what I suspect that you were on ownership can be difficult to establish, if the hider tries at all.

 

Having the police tell you that it is private land is usually a good indication that the owner did not get adequate permission.

 

There is a guideline that caches must be a minimum distance from active railroad tracks and that is pretty well enforced. It's late and I just got in from an apartment fire call and I can't recall the distance at the moment, but it's in the Guidelines, look it up, and if this cache is too close to an active track please report it (Log a Should Be Archived on the cache page).

 

Any time I am told by a landowner or authority such as the police that the cache does not have permission and that cachers do not have permission to be there I file an SBA and let the Reviewer and cache owner work it out... if it has adequate permission, no problem. If it doesn't it will be archived.

 

This whole game is based on trust. Aside from maybe looking at it in Google Earth unless the Reviewer has reason to believe that the cache location requires a higher level of permission he will take the hider's word for it.

 

To list a cache on geocaching.com you have to check the two boxes at the bottom of the cache listing submission page stating that you have read, understand and will abide by the Cache Listing Guidelines and this site's Terms of Use... in other words you tell the Reviewer that your hide has adequate permission, among other things.

 

Unfortunately some cachers either don't know or don't care that checking those two boxes puts their honor and reputation on the line and will check them even if they know that their cache has guideline violation issues. The Reviewer trusts that commitment and lists the cache. If their trust is violated they do want to know.

[+bittsen]

Many times railroads consider their property to be totally private. Where I live, there is one small company that hires private security guards to patrol their tracks. The reason for that is that it is used as a bikeway/jogging path since it very rarely has train on it. They make it very clear to not tresspass.

 

The only sign I saw was no Dumping. maybe the officer was checking to see if I used the place as a dump as well as for drugs. My car is kind of junky. you tend to get profiled in a junky car.

 

That's probably it.

Do a ride along with a police officer sometime. See how they speak about people in "junky" cars. They DO profile them because they assume (and are statistically correct) that people who drive crappy cars don't have insurance. So they usually find a reason to pull them over. The officer I rode with called them "Scum Guppies".

[+buttaskotch]

Are caches listed that are on private and that fact is not mentioned? I went for a cache today thinking it was on public land. As I was leaving a police officer pulled me over. Well, I looked for the cache in the dark. It was listed as a 24/7 cache. It was only like 8:40 or so. The one officer said it was not public land that it was owned by the railroad. they went as far as sending a dog into the woods. I think it was just needless harassment by paranoid police. they didn't charge me with any crime because they couldn't. I didn't believe the officer about it being owned by the railroad either, it wouldn't be the first time a police officer lied. My concern here is if there are listed caches on private land that are not listed as such? I would hate to get a trespassing charge (as unlikely as that is) thinking I was on public land. i think it is DNR management land.

 

The reality is that there are MANY caches that are on private property without permission.

 

Groundspeak is just a listing service and doesn't check when caches are published. The legality of the hide rests with the cache hider.

If the cache was on RR property then there has to be a record of the property somewhere. If the officer just "said" it was RR property, I would forget it and move on. You already found the cache, right?

DITTO. However, STEALTH is the key here. Even at night a degree of steathness should be the norm. Your action called attention to yourself.

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

... However, STEALTH is the key here. Even at night a degree of steathness should be the norm. Your action called attention to yourself.

Stealth as in hiding our caches from Muggles, yes.

 

Stealth as in hiding caches without adequate permission and expecting cachers to 'be stealthy' so that the CO doesn't get busted, no.

[+Castle Mischief]

I'll be the one to ask. Which cache was it?

Edited March 10, 2010 by Castle Mischief

[knowschad]

Of course there are caches that are hidden on private property and not mentioned. Some are deliberately hidden on private property, and some are carelessly, but accidentally hidden there. I'm guessing that this one probably fits that second category (unless the police were mistaken). Regardless of whether the police were mistaken or who owns the property, obviously the area has been tagged by the police, and future cachers are also in jeapordy by going there. I would send a private email to the reviewer of the cache explaining what happened, and let the reviewer make the decision.

 

By the way, if it was indeed railroad land... you're darned right you were doing something wrong. They have serious trespassing laws these days:

Anyone trespassing on railroad property can be arrested if they're caught. It's a Class B misdemeanor that could mean up to six months in jail for anyone caught doing it. ( link )

My question involves criminal law for the state of: Arkansas

 

A group of peers and I have recently been charged with misdemeanor criminal trespassing for our presence on railroad tracks on night. We were committing no other illegal, or even inappropriate acts, and we were unaware of the illegal nature of our presence there, since there were no markers to designate our actions as trespassing.

 

We were also informed that Union Pacific had to stop train movement on the tracks for 15-30 minutes while the officers escorted us off the railroad. Because of Union Pacific's involvement this has been ruled a federal matter and they have assigned a federal agent to handle this. We were also informed that Union Pacific could raise the charge from misdemeanor to felony.( link )

 

 

PS: Sounds like a beautiful place to hide a cache!

[ad5smith]

wow umm good info to know i didn't know that, that was illegal, (not for caching) i sometimes take a short cut while running down a stretch of tracks, hmmm not anymore

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

Perhaps off-topic, perhaps not...

 

Just to clarify a few things for the OP.

 

RXR trespassing laws have existed about as long as railroads have. Mostly for safety and liability.

Not well known is the fact that there are railroad police. They are fully authorized to enforce any law, not just those related to railroads, though it is the railroad that pays them, so they do have a tendency to enforce only those relative laws (not unlike conservation officers who also have full police powers).

 

Regular LEOs sometimes become involved with RXR incidents, but are not as fully aware of those specific types of laws (usually). So, do keep in mind that what "you say, they say" may not be fully true, I would tread lightly on saying that they "lied".

 

To make matters even better, you admit that you don't know. I find it a little hard to swallow that you feel they (or he, as you put it) lied to you. You seem to be making assumptions based upon assumptions.

 

Foremost, you have to consider that a cache very well may have been placed improperly (intentionally or not). If so, you may well be on "the wrong side" of the trespassing fence.

Caches improperly placed do happen. It is something to consider. If you don't consider that as a real possibility, you just may be setting yourself up for a fall. Ratty car or a new Mercedes, it doesn't matter! Many terrorists drive Mercedes, Fords and Toyotas, or even fly airplanes!

 

Currently we, as "stealthy" operators in a somewhat paranoid society must keep these things in mind.

 

What we do and where we go opens the door to these types of incidents. To go forth willie-nillie without a care in the world certainly will subject you to this type of contact. Food for thought, that's all.

[+StarBrand]

I'll take a little different approach here......

 

The land may well be railroad property and somebody called the cops while the OP was there. The police went to investigate (aka - DID thier job).

 

The cache owner (much like the OP) speculated that the property was public land and that he/she had every right to place a cache there. The cache owner was wrong.

 

Why can't this story be just as simple as that??

[+sbell111]

I'll take a little different approach here......

 

The land may well be railroad property and somebody called the cops while the OP was there. The police went to investigate (aka - DID thier job).

 

The cache owner (much like the OP) speculated that the property was public land and that he/she had every right to place a cache there. The cache owner was wrong.

 

Why can't this story be just as simple as that??

It may or may not be that simple, but it isn't necessarily that simple.

[+DragonsWest]

When I seek a cache and see clearly posted "NO TRESPASSING" signs, I do not go any further.

 

I think that's one of the best ways to discourage the placing of caches on private lands without permission.

 

If a cache is placed on private land with permission the Cache Owner (CO) should mention that in the listing.

 

There are COs who place caches on their own or company property with permission.

[jholly]

I have a number of caches on what is clearly private land. The land owner (a lumber company) gives free public access to the property. The only restrictions posted on signs is no motor vehicles, no fires, no camping and not open at night. When I asked a company Forrester about putting caches on the property the response was "Go for it!". I don't bother asking for permission for my caches any longer. Unlike many public lands, there is no restrictions about leaving the trail

[knowschad]

If a cache is placed on private land with permission the Cache Owner (CO) should mention that in the listing.

"Should", yes. But they don't have to, and they don't necessarily always do so.

[+welch]

Are caches listed that are on private and that fact is not mentioned?

 

Yes.

[+geodarts]

If a cache is placed on private land with permission the Cache Owner (CO) should mention that in the listing.

"Should", yes. But they don't have to, and they don't necessarily always do so.

 

While its not always necessary, it can be helpful. After having a few conversations with property owners, security guards, neighbors, and store managers, its nice to know the status of the cache.

 

I have gotten to where I assume most of the standard caches on private property do not have permission unless I am told otherwise. Of course, most of these are lamp post hides in parking lots or in an area that is not posted where the public generally has access.

 

Sometimes its easy to tell, like the one behind fences on property that is posted with "no trespassing" signs. But there were others where I assumed permission was obtained and it was not -- a camo'd container hanging on a fence set back in someone's front yard. And some that are kind of in the middle, one on a trail that is posted if you hike from the fire road at the top of the ridge but open to all if you take the same trail that starts in the open space below (as I did).

 

So if the listing does not say, and it is in a place where I am otherwise uncomfortable searching, I will try to get clarification from the CO and save the search for another day.

 

As an aside, the owner of the one hanging from his fence had no problem with the cache after the CO belatedly contacted him. Most store managers do not seem to care as long as they know you are not doing anything that would damage the property or otherwise cause problems. Some property owners are touchy. And the one behind the fence on posted property -- neither the reviewer or the CO took much of an interest and its in a rural location that is hidden from passing traffic. So it is still there. Maybe one day I will go back for it -- it would not be the first time I have looked for caches in those circumstances -- but so far I have not felt comfortable with this particular one.

Edited March 10, 2010 by Erickson

[knowschad]

one on a trail that is posted if you hike from the fire road at the top of the ridge but open to all if you take the trail that starts in the open space below (as I did).

I'd imagine that its different amonst different states, but would that situation be an enforceable trespass? It is my understanding that, at least in some states, no trespassing signs must be kept up to certain standards of distance apart, be kept up to date, etc. If it is possible to enter from one area without being notified, doesn't that make the one sign that is in place null and void?

[+geodarts]

one on a trail that is posted if you hike from the fire road at the top of the ridge but open to all if you take the trail that starts in the open space below (as I did).

I'd imagine that its different amonst different states, but would that situation be an enforceable trespass? It is my understanding that, at least in some states, no trespassing signs must be kept up to certain standards of distance apart, be kept up to date, etc. If it is possible to enter from one area without being notified, doesn't that make the one sign that is in place null and void?

 

I thought it was odd when I got to the top of the trail and saw all the signs that wanted me to keep out from that direction. But having gotten there, my choices were somewhat limited . . . As to the cache, its in a great location where I had no problem searching except for the fact that it was after dark on a rainy evening and I was up on a ridge.

 

I was tempted to look up my state's law when I hiked to a cache that was two or three miles down a railroad track that had not been used in quite a while. The no trespassing signs were quite rusty, but it was still under the railroad's authority, so in the end I decided that I did not really want to know. I assumed that I was not supposed to be there in the strict sense of the word - even though I had gotten to the tracks without encountering a sign. But it was obvious that there had been plenty of hunters and hikers who had been there before me. It was one of my favorite cache locations, but has long since been archived for other reasons. And now there are plans to revive the track.

Edited March 10, 2010 by Erickson

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

I have lots of places I would like to put one but I don't know WHO to ask.

 

Start with your town clerk or tax office.

[+Castle Mischief]

I have lots of places I would like to put one but I don't know WHO to ask.

 

Start with your town clerk or tax office.

 

Try here too (not available in all areas): http://www.emapsplus.com/

[knowschad]

I have lots of places I would like to put one but I don't know WHO to ask.

Start with your town clerk or tax office.

It not only has been done, but it has a cache, a mayor's office, and a newspaper.

 

The story behind it: http://reason.com/blog/2007/08/31/roll-your-own-city-hall

 

(even more if you Google Mt. Holly, MN )

[Fiver1]

I had no idea that this was a widespread problem. I would never think of placing a cache on private property without getting the explicit permission of the property owner.

 

Interesting that this came up now. My cache (only) was found by a couple yesterday and in their log stated that they wanted to say something to the property owner (store owner) about the cache but didn't because I hadn't spelled out in the cache description that I had obtained permission.

 

I never thought to spell it out, because I would never consider placing without permission. It's always been my understanding that was one of geocaching's cardinal rules. I reckon I'm pretty naive. Guess that's the way I was raised.

 

Oh well, I suspect that as more people get involved in geocaching we're going to see more of this and probably some things we haven't even thought of yet.

[+NanCycle]

animal control was part of the police department as well. I never heard of that.

In our city Animal Control is part of the Police Department.

[+Matt_B_Good]

 

Having the police tell you that it is private land is usually a good indication that the owner did not get adequate permission.

 

I strongly disagree police officers lie all the time and if not lying they probably assume something.

 

There is a guideline that caches must be a minimum distance from active railroad tracks and that is pretty well enforced. It's late and I just got in from an apartment fire call and I can't recall the distance at the moment, but it's in the Guidelines, look it up, and if this cache is too close to an active track please report it (Log a Should Be Archived on the cache page).

 

 

That is not an issue whatsoever with this cache. Establishing who owns the land and if permission was granted is the only issue. That does not mean the railroad doesn't own it. the land I live on was once owned by the railroad because at the time they got it dirt cheap and i am a good 3 miles from any tracks.

[+Matt_B_Good]

Perhaps off-topic, perhaps not...

 

Just to clarify a few things for the OP.

 

RXR trespassing laws have existed about as long as railroads have. Mostly for safety and liability.

Not well known is the fact that there are railroad police. They are fully authorized to enforce any law, not just those related to railroads, though it is the railroad that pays them, so they do have a tendency to enforce only those relative laws (not unlike conservation officers who also have full police powers).

 

Regular LEOs sometimes become involved with RXR incidents, but are not as fully aware of those specific types of laws (usually). So, do keep in mind that what "you say, they say" may not be fully true, I would tread lightly on saying that they "lied".

 

To make matters even better, you admit that you don't know. I find it a little hard to swallow that you feel they (or he, as you put it) lied to you. You seem to be making assumptions based upon assumptions.

 

Foremost, you have to consider that a cache very well may have been placed improperly (intentionally or not). If so, you may well be on "the wrong side" of the trespassing fence.

Caches improperly placed do happen. It is something to consider. If you don't consider that as a real possibility, you just may be setting yourself up for a fall. Ratty car or a new Mercedes, it doesn't matter! Many terrorists drive Mercedes, Fords and Toyotas, or even fly airplanes!

 

Currently we, as "stealthy" operators in a somewhat paranoid society must keep these things in mind.

 

What we do and where we go opens the door to these types of incidents. To go forth willie-nillie without a care in the world certainly will subject you to this type of contact. Food for thought, that's all.

 

Relax, your blood pressure will get too high if you don't. I am not saying the officer lied to me. I am saying that officers lie quite often and I assume they are likely lying rather than assume they are telling the truth. maybe i just have bad experiences with police that abuse their power and don't do their job. they always just seem to want to bother me for nothing.

[+Matt_B_Good]

I had no idea that this was a widespread problem. I would never think of placing a cache on private property without getting the explicit permission of the property owner.

 

Interesting that this came up now. My cache (only) was found by a couple yesterday and in their log stated that they wanted to say something to the property owner (store owner) about the cache but didn't because I hadn't spelled out in the cache description that I had obtained permission.

 

I never thought to spell it out, because I would never consider placing without permission. It's always been my understanding that was one of geocaching's cardinal rules. I reckon I'm pretty naive. Guess that's the way I was raised.

 

Oh well, I suspect that as more people get involved in geocaching we're going to see more of this and probably some things we haven't even thought of yet.

 

That kind of was my notion as well. I assumed that caches placed on private land without permission were the exception. this particular cache has been around for some time.

Edited March 11, 2010 by Matt_B_Good

[knowschad]

Why am I getting the impression that you have no interest in our opinions (or our facts), Matt B. Good? What do you want us to tell you... that yes, cops lie through their teeth? I really don't understand what you are looking for that we haven't already offered.

[+Matt_B_Good]

Why am I getting the impression that you have no interest in our opinions (or our facts), Matt B. Good? What do you want us to tell you... that yes, cops lie through their teeth? I really don't understand what you are looking for that we haven't already offered.

You are being quite rude and disrespectful to me. Please don't say anymore on this thread.

[+bittsen]

Why am I getting the impression that you have no interest in our opinions (or our facts), Matt B. Good? What do you want us to tell you... that yes, cops lie through their teeth? I really don't understand what you are looking for that we haven't already offered.

You are being quite rude and disrespectful to me. Please don't say anymore on this thread.

Oh, I can't wait for his reply to this comment...

 

[knowschad]

Why am I getting the impression that you have no interest in our opinions (or our facts), Matt B. Good? What do you want us to tell you... that yes, cops lie through their teeth? I really don't understand what you are looking for that we haven't already offered.

You are being quite rude and disrespectful to me. Please don't say anymore on this thread.

No, I'm not. Please read my previous remarks that you failed to comment on. I was quite polite and to the point, to the point of doing some research for you. Others have also made some very thoughtful comments, and all you seem to want to do is to complain. Edited March 11, 2010 by knowschad

[+Matt_B_Good]

I have lots of places I would like to put one but I don't know WHO to ask.

 

Start with your town clerk or tax office.

 

Thanks now all i have to do is find where they are.

[knowschad]

Why am I getting the impression that you have no interest in our opinions (or our facts), Matt B. Good? What do you want us to tell you... that yes, cops lie through their teeth? I really don't understand what you are looking for that we haven't already offered.

You are being quite rude and disrespectful to me. Please don't say anymore on this thread.

Oh, I can't wait for his reply to this comment...

 

Look who is being rude and disrespectful. My comment was totally in line. Yours was out of line.

[+Matt_B_Good]

Why am I getting the impression that you have no interest in our opinions (or our facts), Matt B. Good? What do you want us to tell you... that yes, cops lie through their teeth? I really don't understand what you are looking for that we haven't already offered.

You are being quite rude and disrespectful to me. Please don't say anymore on this thread.

No, I'm not. Please read my previous remarks that you failed to comment on. I was quite polite and to the point, to the point of doing some research for you. Others have also made some very thoughtful comments, and all you seem to want to do is to complain.

No, your being an a**. Everyone else other that the one were being helpful. Now really, are you so stupid that you actually post after I ask you not to? You continue to be even more rude. Go away.

[+Matt_B_Good]

Why am I getting the impression that you have no interest in our opinions (or our facts), Matt B. Good? What do you want us to tell you... that yes, cops lie through their teeth? I really don't understand what you are looking for that we haven't already offered.

You are being quite rude and disrespectful to me. Please don't say anymore on this thread.

Oh, I can't wait for his reply to this comment...

 

For what it is worth I feel your comments were just fine.

[knowschad]

Why am I getting the impression that you have no interest in our opinions (or our facts), Matt B. Good? What do you want us to tell you... that yes, cops lie through their teeth? I really don't understand what you are looking for that we haven't already offered.

You are being quite rude and disrespectful to me. Please don't say anymore on this thread.

No, I'm not. Please read my previous remarks that you failed to comment on. I was quite polite and to the point, to the point of doing some research for you. Others have also made some very thoughtful comments, and all you seem to want to do is to complain.

No, your being an a**. Everyone else other that the one were being helpful. Now really, are you so stupid that you actually post after I ask you not to? You continue to be even more rude. Go away.

Would you mind elaborating on exactly what you felt was inappropriate about my comments, and why? I was calling it as I saw it. I told you what I knew about RR trespassing laws, about how some cache owners don't follow the permission rules, about how some try to, but make mistakes. What was rude about that?

[GOF and Bacall]

Why am I getting the impression that you have no interest in our opinions (or our facts), Matt B. Good? What do you want us to tell you... that yes, cops lie through their teeth? I really don't understand what you are looking for that we haven't already offered.

You are being quite rude and disrespectful to me. Please don't say anymore on this thread.

No, I'm not. Please read my previous remarks that you failed to comment on. I was quite polite and to the point, to the point of doing some research for you. Others have also made some very thoughtful comments, and all you seem to want to do is to complain.

No, your being an a**. Everyone else other that the one were being helpful. Now really, are you so stupid that you actually post after I ask you not to? You continue to be even more rude. Go away.

 

Who's on first?

[Mr.Yuck]

Interesting thread. Despite your general "cops suck" attitude, there is an easy solution to this. By 2010 here, just about every County in America has an online GIS, where you can look up property plots all by yourself. Very recently, even Google maps show property lines, although they don't tell you who owns each plot.

 

I do know many abandoned railways in my area are still in private hands, be it the old railroad company (which may or may not be bankrupt and out of business), or if a utility company bought the railroad right of way. Either way, I would not find it unusual for a cache placer to assume any abandoned railway is fair game, and place a cache along one.

[knowschad]

 

No, your being an a**. Everyone else other that the one were being helpful. Now really, are you so stupid that you actually post after I ask you not to? You continue to be even more rude. Go away.

 

Who's on first?

Hey, GOF... any idea what an "a**" is?

[+Matt_B_Good]

thank you to everyone except knowschad for your help. I suppose there has to be at least one flaming troll in every thread?

Edited March 11, 2010 by Matt_B_Good

[knowschad]

 

thank you to everyone except knowschad for your help. I suppose there has to be at least one flaming troll in every thread?

I am really sorry that you feel that way. I asked you to please explain what it was about my posts that you objected to, but all you seem to want to do is to post comments like this one. I was the one that told you that you could have received jail time and/or a stiff fine for accidentally going onto railroad land. I did not troll you in the least, in my view or in my intentions. If you perceived my posts to be that way, please show me the error of my ways and I just might apologize, because that was never my reason for posting.

[Keystone]

Closing thread due to OP misbehavior.